Results matching “newspapers must make themselve”

Managing offensive journalists is easy; if the journalist pushes the envelope too far, terminate his or her employment. But since papers can't fire readers- nor would they want to - newspapers must learn how to manage the questionable user-generated content that inevitably comes with increased interactivity.

Guardian.co.uk's Sean Dodson looks primarily at the example of The Telegraph's MyTelegraph service, which gives readers the opportunity to publish their own stories under the paper's masthead. The service has won The Telegraph accolades, but the year-old service has also put the paper in the middle of the debate over how to best manage and develop UGC.

MyTelegraph, which will launch a redesigned version this summer, boasts some well-written, thoughtful blogs. It also has its share of users with extreme opinions, ranging from active members of far right party BNP to members of an anti-feminist "men's movement."

A statement from a Telegraph spokeswoman emphasized the inevitable fact that "a multiplicity of views will be expressed" on the site. She continued, "Our readers are entitled to their opinions and, within the scope of the law, they're entitled to publish on MyTelegraph."

What do to do though if the comments toe the line of legality? Or if they are just too extreme for most to stomach? Most papers now employ a team of moderators, although the moderation system varies from publication to publication. Newspapers also rely on their users to help moderate; The Telegraph, like others, has a flag offering readers to chance to report offensive material. Moreover, a poll suggests that almost half of internet users favor a voluntary blogger code of conduct in order to suppress overly offensive material.

What distinguishes MyTelegraph from most other UGC services at other newspapers (and what makes effective moderation all the more pertinent) is The Telegraph's rejection of the "gatekeeper" model. Most newspapers, like The Guardian's Comment is Free, allow only bloggers sanctioned by the newspaper to start user debates. But in the Telegraph model, users themselves can propose topics; "MyTelegraph unlocks the gate and hands over the key," writes Dodson.

Newspapers looking for a solution to nasty contributors can also look to Norweigen paper Daily Verdens Gang, which launched a service in 2005 allowing readers to set up their own blogs (25,000 bloggers have joined, 15,000 are fairly active).

"A minority can go too far outside of the legal borders but we have a good control system," said Geir Ruud, VG's online foreign editor. "If they continue to misbehave we kick them out."

Source: Guardian

In this section, John Zogby, CEO of Zogby International, and George Brock, World Editors Forum President and editor of the Saturday Times in the UK, comment on the results of the 2008 Newsroom Barometer. Both agree that the results show editors have opened to the new necessities of the digital age, while remaining strongly conscious of the possible threats to their newspapers and journalism.

(View the main results to this year's survey here.)

According to Brock, this year's survey points to the fact that "editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms," but this is "tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future."

The path is clear for many editors: integrate the newsroom, think multimedia, train or hire a team of multi-skilled journalists. So are the threats: lack of investment, lack of training, lack of cultural change.

In the face of these deep changes for the newspaper industry and its organization, editors may often face managerial resistance to undergo these investments. But media companies must be bold. Their editors, for the most part, are ready to be. Said Brock: "I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities."

For Zogby, who goes into more detail about the numeric results (see below), this year's results show that editors have adapted or are adapting to the current redefinition of the 4th Estate, the press, in light of the changes brought in part by the Internet.

"Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers," as was the case for the previous edition of the Newsroom Barometer, wrote Zogby.

Yet this optimism shouldn't hide the urgency for newspapers to rethink their model. "For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish."

Read Brock and Zogby's full comments below.

Comments on the 2008 Newsroom Barometer by George Brock

Editors remain confident about a mixed-media future and have quietly got on with the business of integrating their newsrooms. The optimism is not universal and it is tempered by anxiety that newspapers are not investing enough in recruitment and training for the future.

Newspaper managements might reply that investment remains risky when it isn't yet clear where the income from digital publishing is supposed to come from. But newspaper businesses are made by content which creates and sustains demand. The first newspapers did not come about when someone assembled advertising platforms, distribution networks and hardware and afterwards looked for content to put into that system.

The sequence of events was the reverse. Somebody wants to tell as many people as possible something of interest or importance, discovers a sustained curiosity in that information or opinion and eventually a publishing operation grows up to supply the demand. The chain reaction is sparked by interest in the story, view, picture, interview, column, cartoon that's on offer. Without that first moment of ignition, nothing else happens.

You think this sounds a little basic? It is. But you would be surprised how often this simple reality is forgotten as today's media businesses struggle to adapt to a world in which digital technology is rewriting the economics of news publishing.

Online news and opinion has now been with us for long enough to see that no prediction about the future of news which is based on technology alone can tell us the future. Newspapers are not just ink marks on squashed trees: they are what people trust, they amuse people, in short they are a collection of ideas and information with which a reader forms a relationship. Where journalism - whether professional, citizen or any mixture of the two - creates that relationship, something lasting is born and can be sustained. You can see examples of success and failure both online and in print. As the first flush of online innovation and enthusiasm wears off, we can see more clearly that some of the online successes will grow very big indeed, but that only the best will prosper. Making information available - and the web makes it available as never before - does not make it wanted. Newspapers which innovate and adapt will also survive because their qualities are more important than the medium. Some of the failures in both online and print will be terminal.

I read the message of this year's Newsroom Barometer as an appeal from editors to their companies to be bold in the face of change and as a sign that they themselves intend to make the most of new opportunities. Most editors are clear that the essential qualities of good journalism can adapt to a new medium. They accept as a fact needing no further debate that their papers will now reach their constituency by several channels and not by one.

Redefining the 4th Estate: Opinions of the Editors by John Zogby

In the 550 years since the first pages of print rolled off the presses in the Bavarian town of Mainz, printed news evolved relatively unimpeded.  Even the invention and proliferation of radio and television failed to stymie the growth of newspapers, largely due to the ability of newspapers to provide more in-depth coverage.
    
The centuries-long hegemony of the ink and paper news model today faces its greatest threat--the advent of an independent and free Internet-based media.  This threat was evidenced at the height of the 2005 British elections with the publication of the 'Downing Street Memo' by The Sunday Times.  That short but potent document presented potentially damning evidence surrounding the planning in the run-up to the Iraq War, and while British papers seized the story, the leaked memo made only slight ripples in the American print media.  It did create, however, a surge within the rapidly developing blog community who used the lack of traditional media coverage as a call to arms.

Now, as the Internet struggles to define itself in the shadow of the Fourth Estate, the question remains: will these two mediums continue to battle for supremacy or will they find stability in an integrated symbiotic relationship? To help bring clarity to this question, Zogby International was commissioned by the World Editors Forum and Reuters to survey 704 newspaper editors worldwide for the second in a series of annual 'Newsroom Barometer Surveys.'

    Perhaps the most important finding to emerge from the 2008 survey is that editors remain optimistic about the futures of their papers.  As in the 2006 Newsroom Barometer, nearly all editors (84%) are optimistic about the future of their paper.  The editors surveyed are as aware of what the future may hold for their industry as they are unified in their recognition of the underlying threats and potential solutions.

The Future

    The majority of editors (56%) now believe that most news (print and online) will be free in the future--up from 48% in 2006.  Nearly two-in-three editors (63%) believe that within a decade the most common form of  news consumption will be some form of electronic media--whether online (44%), mobile (12%) or through newer electronic media like e-papers and tablets (7%).  Less than a third (31%) believe print will remain the most common form of consumption.

    The perception of editors with respect to the future is not limited to the news product itself.  The overwhelming majority (83%) agree that within 5 years their nation's journalist workforce will be expected to know how to produce content for all platforms (e.g., print, video, audio and web).  Still, perception of the future is but one dimension of the story -- the remainder is defined by the threats to the industry and  how editors address those threats. 

The Threats

    By-and-large editors agree on the nature of the threats posed to their industry.  The decline in youth readership (58%), the rise in Internet and digital media (38%) and the lack of editorial innovation (36%) all speak to the consensus that change is imminent.  These editors tell us their chief sources of pressure are from advertisers (22%), shareholders (20%) and political forces (19%).  All pressure, no doubt,  to confront the changing reality through innovation and integration. 

    On one issue editors paint a mixed picture--the current state of their newsroom.  For some (39%) circulation in the past year is up; for others (29%) it is down.  One-third of editors (33%) have added journalists, a quarter have lost journalists (24%) and for the rest (42%) the number of journalists on their staff remains unchanged from a year ago. 


The Solutions

    When a majority of editors (54%) report that they have an integrated newsroom, they may make such statements not necessarily based on the reality, but also out of necessity.  Regardless of whether integration has or has not occurred, nearly all (86%) agree that it will be the norm in the near future.  Editors also agree on the steps needed to address other threats.  Asked what investments they would make in their newsroom given the opportunity, the top two investments cited--training journalists in new media (36%) and recruitment of new journalists (31%)--demonstrate that editors are looking to make a commitment to the future.  And with the recognition that editorial innovation is needed, 69% of editors agree that opinion and analysis pages will play an increasingly larger role in the future. 


Yes, editors are optimistic about the future of their papers, but they are also aware of the potential danger on the horizon.  Less than half (45%) believe the quality of journalism will improve over the next year.  More than a quarter (28%) believe the quality will worsen; a finding reflected in the high level of importance editors place on the need for investment in training and recruitment. 

For these editors the future is self-evident and our survey shows that they see the writing on the newsroom wall.  The evolution of the 4th Estate is no longer questions of if, when or how.  Editors now know the solution:  Innovate.  Integrate.  Or perish.


Read Part 1: Presentation - main results, the integrated newsroom will be the norm
Read Part 2: Multimedia, multi-skilled and integrated
Read Part 3: The future of the press
Read Part 4: Who participated in the survey?
Read Part 5: Comments by John Zogby and WEF President George Brock
Read Part 6: Threats to newspapers, areas of investment, more results

In complement to the previous piece about the Press Association’s training programs, here are a few very practical videojournalism lessons gathered live from the video storytelling class taught by David Dunkley.

The Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association held a symposium entitled "What is expected of newspapers today?" at the beginning of April at which the role of the newspaper for consumers and society was discussed. Various opinions were expressed.

The 6th annual Ifra International Newsroom Summit held in Paris on April 19 and 20 brought some of the newspaper industry’s top thinkers together to share with the crowd their experiences in the digital age, what works, and what needs to be worked on. Presentations ranged from talks of integrated newsrooms to local coverage as well as studies of changing media consumption by the audience.

In the run-up to the US mid-term elections, many news organizations have been using interactives in their website coverage, and often taking advantage of Flash technology to do it.  Are these graphics effective?  Are they worth all the trouble?  Digital media experts Alberto Cairo, Mindy McAdams and Laura Ruel give their assessment, and offer tips for future news website content producers.

On his blog Média Café, newspaper designer and consultant Jeff Mignon asks if traditional print journalists from local papers are ready for a new news age: "Are they ready to pick up the video camera and microphone... Are they ready to ask how should I tell this story... sound, video, text, images, infographics?" He feels that this is imperative to the success of local papers, seeing as most of the news they publish on the web can easily be found elsewhere.

If you talk to any media watcher nowadays, they don’t hesitate to tell you that the globalized world of 24-hour news stations and humongous international news organizations means that smaller newspapers need to focus more on their immediate communities. They also won’t flinch in mentioning that most local newspapers are doing a poor job. A few models of the “new newspaper” exist to which they refer enthusiastically. But a recently launched local website has joined the fray and could become the new reference point. The difference is, it’s not a newspaper.

From time to time here at the Editors Weblog, we like to give you an idea of how journalism on the medium most affecting newspapers is shaping up and how it is going to look down the road. Here's the latest in what's going on in Internet journalism:

Many newspaper pundits have long argued that the future of smaller papers lies in complete and in-depth local coverage. But this doesn't necessarily mean just news. Rob Curley, currently of the Naples Daily News, insists that newspapers have to become an indispensable source of all types of information for their communities and has helped a small paper in Kansas do so. However, a new study shows that Curley's Kansas project is a rare example.

Although it is well documented that newspaper circulations have been declining for years, a slide that does not seem will reverse itself soon, it has been shown that newspaper website usage has been rising rapidly. But does their digital readership make up for the loss in print? Will sustainable online financial models emerge? Will the Internet change newspaper journalism?

Last month in Moscow, the Russian Guild of Press Publishers held the First Russian Publishers Conference.  During the Press Freedom Seminar, President of the World Editors Forum and Saturday Editor of The Times (London), George Brock, gave a talk discussing the freedom of the press in Russia, whose text is posted below.